Yes, I agree.

The problem is that most of those "severe vaccine reactions" are hard to prove. They are so infrequent that they could statistically have happened by chance after a person was vaccinated. Are you aware of one where my statement isn't true? I don't want to be coming from a position of ignorance.

Completely agree. For a brief time, Chrome had vertical tabs built-in as a beta feature. They killed it, and so too they killed my use of Chrome.

Right, but it is extremely unlikely to come up if everyone is vaccinated - thus my claim that a societal solution is needed.

I don't think it should be mandatory, either. But I think that employers should be able to discriminate based on vaccination status. I think that, when there is an outbreak of the disease, non-vaccinated children should not be allowed in school.

Perhaps. Or perhaps it should just be recognized that, on balance, public health efforts such as the measles vaccination program are a big part of why your life expectancy is 80 and not 45.

You guys in Seattle, whether you know it or not, are actually known for your incredibly poor broadband options.

There is one more element to consider: measles is easily wiped out with a universal vaccine program. I have never heard anyone seriously claim that the flu could be wiped out with existing technology. In my opinion, there is a moral distinction between someone who, by their inaction, thwarts the eradication of a disease and someone who simply makes the pragmatic choice of going to work with a flu/cold because of societal pressures.

But in any event, epidemic disease cannot be fought within the framework of individuals. It has to be a collective effort, so libertarian arguments are mostly academic. By the time Disney responded to negative publicity and whatnot, the disease had already spread. The Libertarian argument that the financial incentive not to kill customers will save the day is not very convincing - Disneyland could close today and the disease has already spread... their future behavior is largely irrelevant. Other businesses cannot simply become scared and require vaccines because other financial concerns (of being sued, etc.) pull in the other direction.

I was at work when I typed that or I would have run a test. I just ran the Ookla test and got 23 down / 6 up. Technically I pay something like $53 for the internet, but that includes a $10 discount for having cable, which costs about $10 for limited basic. Without cable, it would be $63 - so I get it for "free" I guess. Taxes and fees and a $2 box rental bring me up to $69.95.

Really, really pricey - but it's good to have a monopoly.

I pay around $70 for Comcast, after all of the taxes and whatnot, for "Performance Internet" only. As far as I can tell, that's 25Mbps down and they don't advertise the up but it is nowhere near symmetric. I think you have a slightly better (though still crappy) deal.

Whatever the battery life, the idea of a $60 computer that can run full-blown windows still kind of blows my mind. I remember when my co-workers and I would come back from Asia with Librettos because we thought they were so mind-blowingly small. :)

Is that the iView? My understanding is that there is a battery life penalty. 2/3 to 1/2 that of a comparable ARM system.

Most of MS's initial attempts are "worthless abortions". I was hoping that they would stick with it in the boneheaded way that they always do to provide another competitive option. You see iOS and Android borrow from MS and from each other. I mourn the loss of competition, not the product itself.

And no, I don't consider the full-blown Surface to be real competition for most Android tablets. It's in the price range of the iPads, but has half the battery life. You have to actually need Windows in order for it to be an attractive option. Interface design is subjective, but the necessity to flip between tablet-land and the traditional desktop seriously hurts usability IMHO. Both Android and iOS are simpler.

That's sad. "Competition" in this space is now between iOS and Android. It's reminding me of the early 90s in the PC realm, and Commodore just bit the dust.

(I apologize to fans of the Amiga for comparing the Amiga to RT. Don't take the analogy too far...)

Your smoking outside does not infringe on my rights. Your obesity does not infringe on my rights. Sure, it makes our group health coverage more expensive, but I'm not ready to call cheaper mutual insurance a natural right.

In the past, we've gotten by with having most people get vaccinated, and the fringe weirdos could slide along with herd immunity. The problem now is that we have too many fringe weirdos - to the point where they don't even consider themselves weird. This is at least in part thanks to the self-reinforcing nature of the internet and celebrities.

We just need to get back to the "fringe weirdos" stage, not get 100% compliance. It would be a shame to abandon too much of our country's libertarian ideals for this one problem - but I'll grant you that sometimes you have to cave to reality. A good example is war - people go in with all sorts of ideals about how wars should be fought, but an enemy without those ideals can force you to play their game instead. Measles does not respect individual liberty, and we need to be cognizant of that in our response.

By knowingly making themselves an incubator for a communicable disease.

By their very nature, epidemics need to be managed at the society level. I think libertarianism is a fantastic base ideology, but communicable disease tends to not care much for individual-based thinking.

No, I'm saying, "You are going to make other people here, or their non-vaccinated dependents, sick."

I mean, this story is a perfect example that it isn't just a matter of sick days. Disneyland has a real nightmare on their hands.